Canadian by birth, Southern (Ontario) by the Grace of God.- yeah it's a Lynyrd Skynyrd reference

Tuesday, June 29, 2004

the election is over. what an interesting result. so we face a minority Liberal government. I suppose the question is what that will mean to us and what will be the result. One obvious result is that we will be going to the polls in probably two years. The second is that all of a sudden, Paul Martin is going to have to keep some of his promises. I know what you're thinking, a Liberal keep his word, what a concept. If the NDP comes with a list it will mean Paul will have to become a liberal. You see one of the great myths in Canada is that Paul Martin is a liberal. He is not, he is a conservative multi-millionaire. The only thing that interests him is not paying Canadian taxes. It is still the irony that the man who wants us to pay for all the benefits of being a Canadian doesn't like his company paying any taxes. You would think the man who believes paying taxes is a patriotic duty would gladly get rid of those 'flags of convenience' and pay his fair share. Of course, this is another example of the two rules that exist, one for the rich and one for the rest of us. The big difference is that the rest of us get to pay.

I was glad the local candidate I supported go elected. Jeff Watson will do a good job representing this riding in Ottawa. He's got some good ideas and will make a strong presence nationally. One difference between him and Susan Whelan is that he had to work to be elected and not depend upon the last name. Oh yeah, and some of his election workers, very nice.

I did some scrutineering last night, oversaw the counting of the ballots. I want to say this right here, right now, Liberals cheat. This one fellow decided a spoiled ballot should count, yes I immediately put on a challenge. Had this been a narrow election my objection could have made a lot of difference. Lesson to all, a Liberal will cheat, steal and do practically anything to win. Perhaps we should give Liberal supporters a world map to show Canada is not a bananna republic.

The biggest disappointment I had, besides the minority Liberal was the turn-out. I thought there was sufficient interest to get a huge crowd but the turn-out was the same as 2000. At 60.6% that means a lot of Canadians didn't get out to vote. Of course there will be the questions and probably the best answer is the fact a sizable number of Canadians have lost faith in the political process. The mantra, 'they're all a bunch of crooks' is one that comes out of the mouth of Canadians too easy. Of course if you examine the last 11 years of Jean Chretien, it's easy to understand why the cynicism has developed. Here was a man who went out of his way to prove politicians are crooks. He ruled with an iron fist, abused opponents and spent money on his cronies. He lied about the sale of his property and to ensure that the right people got the right money put pressure on the President of the Business Development Bank, to the point he resigned. This man later sued the government and won. Also for the people of Ontario, with the McGuinty break a promise a week regime there is a lot of mistrust. It's sad because not all of them are crooks, just the ones who run under the Liberal banner.

Monday, June 28, 2004

This is it everybody. The big day. Like the headline in the Globe says, just vote. Today is the day we decide who will govern our lives for the next number of years, or perhaps a better time, months. It's easy to sit home and not bother. You look about and spout the mantra 'they're all crooks'. Well, who's fault is that? By not voting you give those in power the idea that they can get away with murder because no one really cares. Prove them wrong and show yoou care by doing one of the easiest chores imaginable. Go to the poll take a little piece of paper, go behind this cardboard booth and make an 'x' at your choice.

Don't know where the poll is, go to your recycle box and pull out on of those election flyers and call the local candidate's office. Tell them you need a ride and they'll come and get you. For the ultimate irony, call the office of the candidate you're not voting for, just don't tell them that.

Saturday, June 26, 2004

If you can remember that far back, Paul Martin had a few photo ops with his new best friend Bono. Bono if you don't know is the lead singer of the band U2, and one of the most social aware rockers you will meet. To give you the scenario, Bono was real happy that his new pal Paul Martin was big on supporting the fight against AIDS in Africa. Paul promised to do whatever is in his power to ensure generic drugs reach this troubled continent.

Let me say I support all efforts to fight this horrible disease, the numbers coming out of Africa are appalling. What's worse is the major pharmaceuticals are doing all in their power to stop this from happening. They don't want to have anything cut into their profits. The tragedy of it all is found in this line: ""Meanwhile, three million people are dying each year from AIDS despite the fact that effective life-extending treatment is already available for less than $1 a day". Lives lost for profit. It is incumbent on the west I believe to help fight this disease. We need to.

What's all this got to do with Paul Martin, well I don't read his name anywhere standing up and demanding the G-8 nations do anything. I mean, yeah they made promises to solve the world's problems, eventually. Listen up all, the world can't wait for the richest nations to get around to it, it must be done now. I notice that when the issue of debt forgiveness to the third and fourth world was brought up by Tony Blair, it was ignored. By the way Paul, this is another favourite topic of your friend Bono. He strongly supports debt forgiveness. It is criminal that the IMF and World Bank demands repayment for loans that basically repays other loans. The IMF puts demands on these nations that destroy whatever social safety net existed. This is a crime, but again, silence from the G-8. Yes they'll do something, eventually, when they get around to it.

Friday, June 25, 2004

I hadn't planned on writing about the election today, I had a story about my cat. I'll mention it at the end of this. Things are getting mighty interesting for the NDP, the headline for today tells of supporters of Sheila Copp switching to the NDP. In a way this is not a surprise, Paul did play fast and loose with Sheila, obviously punishing her for daring to run against him for the leadership of the Liberal Party. In all honesty I am not a fan of Sheila but I must admit, she was hosed by the pro-Martin supporters in the battle for the riding. An interesting comment made by one of her supporters is this: "At a news conference, former Liberal supporter Jimmy Lomax threw his support behind NDP candidate Tony DePaulo.
'We don't want (Prime Minister Paul) Martin,' Lomax said. 'Martin represents dishonesty. How many lies has he told us already?'". Now this is nasty. I suspect these people are becoming public with the blessing of Sheila? If so then Hamilton may be a very interesting place on the 28th, after all the Copps name carries a lot of support in that city and if it is even believed that Sheila would rather support the NDP then the Liberals it will be game over. I suspect there shall be some interesting races, especially the former riding held by Sheila. There is probably a great deal of animosity towards Martin and this is just some fuel for the fire.

All this is happening at a time when Paul is busy drumming support: Martin appeals to NDP voters to vote Liberal. This is interesting, if you read the article Paul told NDP supporters that he and they shared the same core values. Yes, I can almost hear the NDP'ers rolling on the floor with laughter over that. Yes the NDP with its strong labour roots have much in common with the multi-millionaire owner of Bahamas, erm Liberia, ummm, Canada Steamship Lines. Paul is saying the parties shaer the same view of minority rights, well, that may be true, if we could ever figure out what Paul Martin does belive in, besides clinging to power. Memo to all NDP'ers out there: you share nothing with Paul Martin. Remember he's the guy who gutted the Health Care system. He's the guy who killed social housing. He's also one of the people that used taxpayer dollars for his buds in Quebec. You share nothing with him. Don't be fooled.

I don't think I'ver ever seen a politician so desperate as Paul Martin. He's losing, no he's lost. It's all but over Paul. The pain, well actually, part of the pain will be over on the 28th, although I think some more pain will be soon coming your way. If you listen real hard you can hear them sharpening their knives in Liberal backrooms across the nation. Paul, I would now begin to watch your back.

Now for the cat story. Let me say I like cats. I own a cat, but there are times they bug me. Yesterday I was sitting outside with my cat when he decided to go for a stroll. He went to the wood pile and sniffed around. It was then I saw him launch and grab something. Yes he decided to get in touch with his inner cat and grab a baby bird. Needless to say I went right after him and took it out of his mouth, the bird was a Blue Jay. The place exploded in noise and feathers, I picked up the little bird and was almost attacked by Jays. After some work the bird flew over the fence where the parent birds proceeds to squawk and bomb anything, including me, that moved. I kept an eye on the bird when I could and the Jays were in a very offensive mode. The bird stayed in the neighbour's yard for the night and I could see the parent birds were very occupied keeping an eye for any more predators. At one point, I saw them dive at another cat, who wasn't even near their bird.

When I woke up this morning I heard the Jays. When I let the cat out the Jays were very aggressive and so our cat was cowering on the back porch. I decided to see if I could find the little bird, I did, back on the woodpile, just looking at me. with the feel of feathers, wings and air in my hair, I was divebombed, I left the bird alone. At lunch the Jays and the young chick were gone, the adventure was over.

Thursday, June 24, 2004

I've been reading the news today about the Fete-nationale celebrations in the Province of Quebec. It is interesting to consider how a party that calls themselves the party of Quebec continually blows it. If you remember the last referendum the Federal government under Chretien was so lackadasical about it they nearlu lost. If it wasn't for people like Jean Charest it would hàe gone the other way.

The Liberals response to this was to set up the policy of having a prominent presence in the province. This meant sponsoring sports shows & other shows. Of course the result of this was Adscan. The money that was supposed to show the flag ended up in the pockets of friends of the PM.

How did the feds respond to this? One cabinet minister shrugged it off as 'business as usual' in Quebec. So their response to scandel was to say corruption was the usual way in Quebec. The result? The potential is a Bloc sweep in the province. So the end result may be a rejuvinized separtist movement. I hope those companies enjoy the spoils because that money may cause all of us grief.

Thanks Chretien, this is your legacy. Paul, I hope you liked your stay at Sussex Drive, because its coming to an end.

Wednesday, June 23, 2004

I guess the message here is guys and gals, get some good anti-virus protection. That's the message for today. There's so much nasty stuff, probably some sent by spammers, that we need to guard the computers. These clowns will do anything to get their garbage in our mailboxes. So do what you can to stop this nonsense.

Tuesday, June 22, 2004

Here's one of those articles that make you go 'huh'? Margaret Atwood is worried that if the new Conservative government gets in will destroy culture. Now understand had the article been one that points out the need and importance of culture as an election issue whe would have been correct. Culture is not being discussed. Culture is not just an important industry but the means by which Canadians can articulate what being a Canadian means. After all, culture defines a people.

However poor Margaret can't leave well enough alone. She attacks the Conservative party as a bunch of phillestine hicks that will slash and burn culture. She accuses them of applying the rules of the market to culture. In one quote she says: """Own merits" is a slippery term. In the marketplace, it doesn't mean "artistically excellent," it just means "marketable." Big money will decide what you read, view, and hear". Actually 'own merit' can mean excellence. You see people aren't stupid. I know those in the artistic community have a rather elitist view towards the unwashed but guess what. It's the unwashed that made Stratford a success and the Shaw Festival of NOTL the great venue it is. People want great culture and they will pay.

Understand I know the need of government support, the problem in Canada is that it is beside the US. That cultural behemoth is so large that it overshadows everything else. However I believe Canadians want to know its stories. What is needed is great culture. In my hometown an 'artist' won some GG award for putting 10 bottles of water in a line. Now I know there's a message here, but what it is fails me.

Culture is important, who will protect it best. I don't know. From Margaret's articles she reminds us that the Liberals do nothing. If she's inferring that it best to support the Liberals because 'at least with them you know what you get', you will continue to keep culture mired in mediocrity.

Thursday, June 17, 2004

Okay, I'm out of the loop. I will confess it here and now. I don't have a clue what's going on but this "All your base are belong to us" is hilarious. Sorry for being about 3 years late. This is very very very funny.

I was watching X-Play on the new G4TechTV channel, which I am still not happy about, when Adam was talking about this video. He played some of it and it is laugh out loud funny. Being the Internet guy that I am, I googled it and came across a whole lot of material on it. I discovered the history, I watched the video and I downloaded the mp3 file.

All that's really left for me to do is buy the t-shirt, which I can do by staying with the official video site. I also discovered that Wired Magazine had an article on it. I learned it's history. It is very funny. This is why the Internet exists, to take an obscure line from an obscure game and turn it into a phenomenum. And to think some people call the Internet a great waste of time. All this from a game, this is great.

Yeah, I'm not going to say anything about politics, yes I am. I went to a Stephen Harper rally in my home town. It was amazing, I never thought you could get that many people to a Conservative Party rally ever. Trust me, the city I grew up in was not know as a Conservative stronghold ever. Yet that many, a lot of energy. I know the Liberals are releasing a poll saying they are on the rebound. Hmm, I wonder. I don't know, maybe, maybe not. Still we are two weeks away from decision day. All I can say is, it's going to be interesting.

Wednesday, June 16, 2004

The Leaders Debate

well I mentioned I opine a bit more on the above. I have to admit I find the news reports interesting, first of all I went to the Sympatic/MSN/CTV.ca report and I felt this was a fair point. I would agree that the winner, not by much, was Stepehn Harper. I say this because he was the coolest under fire, he made his points and his overall presentation was good. If there is a big loser it has to be Paul Martin. He seems unsure of himself although to be honest being placed on the defensive from the get go was not the best way to be. However he should have realized he would be the centre of attention. As much as he tried to deflect it to Harper, it seemed to fail. The person having the most fun was Gilles Ducette, although there was an interesting moment when he challenged Stephen Harper on french rights outside of Quebec, Harper mentioned that it was 'rich coming from a man who's done nothing to protect English rights in Quebec'. Jack Layton did well, making sure Paul Martin was aware of all his broken promises of the past ten years. He did say that he was miffed that Martin constantly talked about the fact there was only two parties that could form the government. He was perturbed and kept bringing it up.

On the social issues, namely abortion and same sex marriage, a couple interesting discussions, Paul was attacking Stephen on his threat to use the 'notwithstanding' clause of the Charter. He said it was terrible that the Conservatives would attempt to stifle the rights and freedoms of Canadians, and that He Paul would protect the rights of all Canadians. Stephen seemed to have gotten through that relatively unscathed. It was an interesting point that Jack Layton went more after Paul Martin on this point, his mentioned that at least with Stephen Harper you knew his opinion. He criticized the PM for not expressing an opinion and hiding behind the Supremem Court. Mr. Martin was asked by M. Doucette to state his personal opinion about marriage, all Paul did was blather on about the constitution and the Charter.

Memo to Paul Martin: fire your handlers and trainers, they did a horrible job preparing you for this debate. You had to know what you were to be confronted on. One of the funnier moments I thought was when he and Jack Layton went on about missle defence with the Americans, aka Star Wars 2. All Paul Martin could babble on was 'weaponization of space'. What was funny is that he didn't say it once, or just twice, but on and on. My son and I wondered how drunk you could get if you placed a 'weaponization of space' drinking game.

Paul was flustered throughout the two hours, even when he tried to sound Prime Ministerial he was flat. Whatever momentum the Liberals hoped went crashing and burning on that night.

To keep a sense of fairness, I went to the Toronto Star website and of course they declared Paul Martin the winner. Chantel Hebert had a most interesting take, saying that it will help Paul Martin's chances, huh? For what? Certainly not to win, sorry Chantel, you're confused. Another columnist, Antonio Zerbisias wrote in her column: "But last night, during the English language federal leaders debate, Conservative Leader Stephen Harper couldn't make eye contact". That's odd Antonio, he was always looking at the people he was address, Jack kept looking at the camera, Martin was going twenty shades of red and Gilles was having a good time. Then again, you got to remember this is the Toronto Star, the inhouse organ of the Liberal party of Canada. Memo to Antonio, I watched the debate, I didn't listen to the radio, or to streaming audio on the net, via TV and guess what, your bias is showing darling.

Well, that's my take. Was there an outright winner, no, was there an outright lose, yes, Paul Martin.

Tuesday, June 15, 2004

This is a quick response. I've got to agree, Harper had a better showing, he was poised, calm and definately knew his material. He did not get rattled when confronted on the moral issues. On the other hand Paul was stumbling a lot.

I had a very interesting lunch today. I was invited to attend a special luncheon meeting, hosted by the local Campaign Life office. Let me say first of all the pizza was delicious. I am very influenced by the quality of pizze available to me. I will also say that it felt a bit funny being the token protestant. I mean no disrespect, its just pro-life meetings and movements are heavy with catholics. Not, to quote Jerry Seinfeld, there's anything wrong with that.

Besides the pizza and demographics what made it a fascinating time was the speaker. The guest was a well known member of parliament who is very outspoken on this opinion of pro-life and other subversive thoughts. He was extremely articulate, quoting from diverse thoughts as the US Declaration of Independence to John Paul the Second. He discussed what is the definition of democracy and in light of this day and age, it's important. He states that democracy, to be understood from a Christian perspective is that it is a system of government that is predicated on the truth of the human nature, that made in the image of God and as such possesses inalienable and inviolable rights. He further stress that any democracy which does not adhere to this principle is in danger of turning into a veiled form of fascism.

All this was said in light of recent directives from the Prime Minister who believes that the issue of abortion is not to be discussed on any level. As you may know Stephen Harper said he would allow a private member's bill to be tabled on the issue of abortion and that there would be a free vote. What the speaker pointed out despite the hue and cry, this is simply enforcing the rules of parliamentary democracy. This is true, there is a place for private member's bills, they are accured the right to a free vote and many are so tabled. Usually the bill tends to be defeated but it allows members of parliament to bring forward issues they feel is important. It appears the man, Paul Martin, who once lamented on the "democracy deficit" is willing to increase the deficit on this one issue.

I have real problems when anyone decided that an issue can't be debated in an open manner, I wonder if it is because the side desiring the suppression cannot argue their issue in an open manner. what is the problem, is abortion an issue that can stand on its merits? What other social issues will Paul Martin declare to be not open for discussion. I wonder are we truly in a time where democracy is becoming a veiled form of fascism? In the quest for tolerance are we becoming intolerant. Whether a person agrees or not we live in the age of the marketplace of ideas. The idea of the marketplace was articulated by Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes. He believed; "In 1919, Justice Holmes filed a dissent in Abrams v. United States in which he created the powerful and enduring "marketplace of ideas" metaphor to encapsulate the concept of freedom of speech. In the marketplace metaphor, ideas compete against one another for acceptance -- with the underlying faith that truth will prevail in such an open encounter." This analogy is crucial for the survival of democracy, if we place arbitary limits, not for reasons of human safety but for reasons of a particular idealogy, we undermine democracy. If you want to read more follow this link.

It has to be understood that democracy can be messy, people can and say some rather unpleasant things, they can espouse views which are not very nice. However do we say that because we shouldn't say such things, are we empowered to supress them. Most people would probably agree that such thoughts should be suppressed, but what if its your turn to have your thoughts suppressed. The Poem on the wall of the Holocaust Museum in Washington DC says it best: " "When they came for the gypsies, I did not speak, for I am not a gypsy. When they came for the Jews, I did not speak,because I wasn't a Jew. When they came for the Catholics, I did not speak, for I am not a Catholic. And when they came for me, there was no one left to speak."

Where does it end is the question, what next shall be declared sacrosanct and no longer discussed. In our day and age of alledged tolerance, heaven help you if you uphold an opposing view, because you shall be declared a danger and a threat to society.

Sunday, June 13, 2004

What's on my mind Sunday Afternoon

Well I finally saw the vaulted Liberal Attack Ad, good to see my taxdollars at work. The ads are aimed to portray Stephen Harper as a very bad man, who will change Canada and make it a very scary country. So scary you won't recognize the place. Eeew, that's scary stuff boys and girls, to quote Count Floyd.

How scary, let's consider it, first of all the commercial begins by saying that if Stephen Harper had been PM, Canada would be in Iraq, actually if Paul Martin had been Prime Minister, Canada would have been in Iraq. The second point is that the Conservatives will repeal gun laws and make Canada a dangerous place. What the Conservatives would do is scrap the gun registry which has done nothing but piss off a lot of hunters, trappers and farmers and removed a lot of cash from law abiding people. As far as I know the Gun Registry has done nothing to stem the use of guns in crime, or stem the trade in illegal weapons. Got news for the Liberals, crooks don't register guns. It also warns us that our health care will be jeopardized by US style tax cuts. The funny thing, our system is in jeopardy from Martin's hack and slash budgets of the 90's and his US style corporate tax cuts in the early 2000's. Then there is the threat that a Harper government would make a deal with the devil himself, that's Gilles Ducette by the way. Like Martin wouldn't. Then there's the old saw about 'taking away a woman's right to choose. Some of this stuff isn't worth dealing with. Lame Paul, very lame.

Now if you want to see a great ad, click on the link, Ed Broadbent doing rap. Sort of laugh out loud funny. There needs to be more humour, you got to love a political party that doesn't take itself too serious all the time.

Watched England vs France at Euro2004, what can I say, England won in the first 90 and France won in the last 5. Two great goals by Zidane left the English fans in total shock and disbelief. While Beckham assisted with a masterful free kick, his failure to score on the penalty shot opened the way for France to first tie the game and then, after a dreadful brain cramp by Steve Gerrard which caused David James the goalie to tackle Thierry Henry in the box, Zidane scored on his penalty shot for the 2-1 lead and win.

I also did my 7 k run, very warm, but at least I beat the storm. Hey, what's this about Star Choice making us pay for the Weather Network? Contact them and yell at them. This is not a very good idea guys and gals. Weather needs to be free.

I know that sounds bad, personally I'm looking forward to England vs France. Let's see if Beckham can make people forget about those SMS to that chicky. Better bend it Beckham, that's all I got to say.

Hey how about all the silverware picked up by the Bolts? Good going Marty, Brad & Torts for winning the individual honours. Thank you guys for a great Stanley Cup final.

Thursday, June 10, 2004

The Liberals are desperate and are now using attack ads against Stephen Harper. You know I don't know if I'm at all surprised. One week the PM says he's going to stick to issues and approach this election on a moral high ground and the next its attack ads. Here is a party that is beyond desperate. I read over the notes and its the usual stuff, that Harper would have sent troops to Iraq ( so would Martin) or that he will change Canada. You know the funny thing is, what's wrong with changing Canada? We have been mired in a sea of cynicism and funk for the last 10 years, maybe a change will be good for us.

What bothers me is that they think this sort of thing will work, that scaring us will get us to flock to the safety of the Liberal party. Memo to Paul Martin, go back to Ontario in the early 90's your man David Petterson, who was Premier and had just called a snap election warned Ontario about the "Socialist Hordes" at the gate and guess what, it didn't work. The electorate is not a bunch of little children that can be frightened into believing their is a bogeyman. It's time the politicians need to grow up and discuss issues.

All this tells me Harper is on a roll, the Liberals are in total confusion and disarray. I can't wait to read that either another Liberal rat is leaving the sinking ship or they'll be a near revolt in Liberal ranks.

Wednesday, June 09, 2004

I want to give a little lesson on civics. First of all, I do find it funny when Liberals get in a huff over ethical issues, I mean if there's a group that would have problems with ethics its the Liberals. The issue is abortion and the fact that Stephen Harper will allow a free vote on abortion if a privatemembers bill was introduced. I know its important to present your own bias and I will, I am pro-life. I am not a hardcore pro-lifer because I understand there may be circumstances, such as the mother's life in jeopardy which could mean that it might be necessary.

The controversy stems from what happened with Cheryl Gallant:"The women are also concerned about a comment made by Tory MP Cheryl Gallant at a recent pro-life rally on Parliament Hill attended by some Liberal MPs". She was wrong to compare abortion to the beheading of that American, but this is the election and rhetoric tends to be in high gear.
The problem I have is that pro-abortionists are so right about their view is that they allow no other view to be expressed. Hey, all you Liberal pro-abortionists, let me remind you of something, this is Canada this isn't Russia of the 1930's when Stalin told you what to think and heaven help you if you decided to stray from his opinon. Then again, we did have Chretien of the 1990's and with the exception of mass executions and gulags its almost the same. You see, we're so used to being told not to think that when someone suggests thinking it's almost a sin. Funny thing is there are Liberals who agree with Ms Gallant. My it must be refreshing to be allowed to say what you think eh guys and gals.

As for the "notwithstanding" clause of the constitution, let's remember that it was put there by the federal Liberals under that democrat Pierre Trudeau. It has been used once, I believe its called Bill 101 in Quebec.

You can tell things are in trouble when Liberals decide to take a high moral road. Morality and Liberals, can't occur in the same sentence.

Tuesday, June 08, 2004

I watched game 7 of the Stanley Cup finals last. Finally one say hockey is over, perhaps until August (World Cup) or for a very long time. depending on the CBA negotiations. But that could be a topic for future blogs.

Let me say I've been a Lightning fan from day one. I used to spend a lot of time in Tampa & have great memories. I have owned a jersey for a long time & a hat & a tee. I saw them play in Vancouver when I lived out there. I have a couple of year books & so I wouldn't call myself a bandwagon jumper. I was so very happy that the Bolts won the Cup. I was on the edge of the bed. I didn't watch my of the play in the final minute, I was counting down the seconds.

Monday, June 07, 2004

There is now some discussion regarding the Conservative Party desire to allow 'free vote' & private member bilis on issues such as abortion. The idea here is that MP's are individuals of intellect & should be allowed to exercise that intellect. PM Martin spoke of the 'democratic deficit' in Canadian government. For too long the whip , under the control of the PMO has been informing MP's what to think and how to vote.

So what about free votes and privaie member bills? Couple this with the Conservative ibeliefs in ihe grassroots it can mean some interesting days. The question is what is an MP^ is he or she the mouthpiece for their constituency or do we elect them & allow to act in the best interest of the constituents and the nation. Do they act for us or as agents of us?

Not that is a new question, it was asked & one answer was given by Edmund Burke. His speech to the Electors of Bristol present the view of the MP as representing a constituency rather then the constituents. Thus the election becomes the means by which the electoate express their approval, or disproval of their actions. Has times changed. Are the points Edmund Burke made relevant today. Reading his speech I realized he was presenting his defense for his actions. I should look up the results of that election.

He did make an interesting point:e done: 'Gentleman, bad laws are the worst sort of tyranny.'
This is to be remembered no matter what the source. The fear is that private members bills will lead Canada to develop into a Taliban West. Bad laws can come from any source and I hope everyone remembers this reality. As for the grassroots, yes we can be opinionated and perhaps at times bigoted. People can also be thoughtful & having insight that can be very profound.

Saturday, June 05, 2004

The latest poll staies the obvious, the local CPC candidate 42%. Liberal 18%. However an interesting observation is the Green Party candidate is just ahead of the incumbent Liberal. So in the right wing rural riding (say the 3x fast) the Greens are second! This is fabulous news. If I read the polls right Jeff Watson should be more concerned about the Green candidate then Susan Whelan.

Friday, June 04, 2004

Here it is everyone, the explanation of the parties. Of course the ultimate answer is 163, but the importance is the explanation.

Liberals: we shall spend billions to ensure that Canadians enjoy a unique Canadian lightbulb and if I don't change it within the next 2 or three years, I'll resign.

conservatives: we know you demand a change in lightbulb and we will spend about as much money as the Liberals and we'll cut your taxes and slash the graft and corruption that led to the bulb going out.

NDP: It is Paul Martin's fault that the lightbulb went out.

BQ: who cares, we're leaving

Green Party: we will install an energy efficient lightbulb that uses alternative energy.

Marijuana Party of Canada: Dude, smoke this and you won't care if the light is out or not. Whoa anybody got some munchies?

Thursday, June 03, 2004

I've read with interest the numbers that are coming from Paul Martin. For a person who made a reputation as a fiscal conservative & responsible ministry he's promising everybody a lot of cash. The last number is 27 Billion dollars. He is promising: more money for health care, defense. seniors, disabled & now a national day care policy.

You know this is why people are cynical. Consider a few points the first is all these promises have been said before. This is like every election promise the Liberals have for the last 20 years. The only difference is more money. Second for the last years. forget that, the last year there has been no money for healthcare, cities or the military. Now all of a sudden he can find it. What was it under the cushions at Sussex Drive?

What disturbs me beside this being a new bunch of promises that wont be kept is that its all the same. This is the 4th or 3rd year of a new century & why no new vision for Canada? This could be an election that looks to the future with excitement but all we get are Liberals throwing money at 'problems'.

Let's remember Paul Martin believes it Canadian to pay more taxes so you know what mean our paycheques are not. Oh by the way for a person who loves u & me paying taxes he makes sure his company Canadian Steamship Lines doesn't pay taxes by flying 'flags of convenience'.

Wednesday, June 02, 2004

I truly believe Paul Martin missed his calling, and that is as a stand up comic. I'm not talking about his promise to give seniors and people with disabilities money, I mean this is chalked up as just another promise to be broken. The only seniors and people with disability that will see money are the "Friends of the Prime Minister". What I thought was funny was this comment: Martin admitted to making mistakes, but he defended his party's governing record over the past decade.

"It is also true in the last 10 years there have been incidents that have caused concern and dismay among Canadians," Martin said.

Dismay? Concern? How about anger Paul? How about rampant cynicism. These weren't just 'incidents', this was part of your record. This was a planned by the Prime Minister Office to rob Canadians blind while making sure their friends were taken care of. This is not an incident, this is the way things were done by your government. Yes, your government, you were the second most powerful man in the land and don't say it was just a couple of 'incidents'. This isn't a few kids stealing candy bars on a dare, this was government policy.

He promised to resign if his promises aren't kept. Before you start having your faith restored let me remind you of an event a few years ago. During the 1993 election Sheila Copps promised to resign if the Liberals didn't get rid of the GST. Well they didn't and she had to be shamed into resigning. Of course she resigned her seat and then ran in the upcoming by-election which she ran. This says a great deal about the people of Hamilton by the way, the result was a lot of money was spent on a silly byelection. The question, why did she run? Nothing changed, except she demonstrated a depth of cynicism that is mind boggling.